A ruling to make Connecticut proud

Published 5:07 pm, Wednesday, June 26, 2013

The Supreme Court on Wednesday showed that the rest of America is starting to catch up to Connecticut.

For all the issue's volatility nationwide, it remains notable how uncontroversial same-sex marriage is in this state. There has been some opposition, though far less now than when it was approved five years ago, but state residents have, in general, shrugged off this debate.

Connecticut was a pioneer. Back in 2005, it became just the second state to allow civil unions for same-sex couples, which were sold as providing all the rights of marriage. Three years later, though, the state Supreme Court invalidated the civil unions law, saying it fell short of offering same-sex couples the full rights of married couples, and ordered same-sex marriage legalized. In response, the Legislature passed a bill updating marriage statutes and Gov. M. Jodi Rell signed the law.

But even then, the rights and responsibilities of same-sex couples fell short. Thanks to the federal Defense of Marriage Act of 1996 (defense against whom was never specified), passed by bipartisan majorities and signed by President Bill Clinton, same-sex couples were denied standing under federal law. This meant, in addition to basic inequality, many couples legally married in the state of Connecticut had different tax status, different rights to federal benefits, and dozens of other differences large and small that had the effect of declaring their marriages to be second class.

This was what the U.S. Supreme Court ruled invalid on Wednesday. There will be no more second-class marriages after a majority on the court declared that the 1996 law served no purpose other than to discriminate.

It is a landmark in the fight for equality.

And it is one Connecticut should take special pride in celebrating. This is a state that helped show the rest of the country what marriage can mean. This state showed that expanding marriage rights to same-sex couples can benefit everyone and while harming no one.

The joy of Wednesday's ruling, however, only partly overshadowed the damage done the day before, when a majority on the same Supreme Court eviscerated the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965.

No matter how times have changed in recent decades, the right to vote remains under attack in much of the country. The never-ending drive for unnecessary voter ID laws, which do nothing to combat fraud but only serve to discourage legitimate voters, is proof enough of that. Yet the court took the view, unsupported by the facts, that the country no longer needs to vigorously protect every citizen's right to the franchise. It was as demoralizing a defeat as Wednesday's victory was exhilarating.

Taken together, they combine to show how far our country has come, and how far we have to go.